Screen

Preview

Resource ID

10392

Access

Open

Contributed by

Frederik Wellmann

date (Robin)

c. 1905

type of material

A. MS. notebook

description

Selections from first notebook published as 1.294-299, 1.313, and 1.313n selections from second notebook (pp. 65-69) were published as 1.350-352. Omissions from publication (First Notebook) include the disassociation of pragmaticism from some doctrines which have become associated with it for example, the denial of the Absolute, the affirmation of a Finite God, making action (brute force) the sammum bonum. ". . . I am one of those who say 'We believe in God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible' where the invisible things, I take it, are Love, Beauty, Truth, the Principle of Contradiction, Time, etc. Clearly I can have but the vaguest analogical notion of the Maker of such things, and Pragmaticism, I am sure, does not require that all my beliefs should be definite." CSP thinks that Royce in The World and the Individual comes closer to exhibiting the meaning of pragmatism than any exposition of it given by a pragmatist other than himself. Another misrepresentation of pragmaticism is to assert that pragmatism depreciates science. The principal question for pragmaticism must be whether thought has any meaning or purport beyond the simple apprehension of the thought itself. Also omitted is a discussion of the four sects of logic: Leibnizian, Associationist, Aristotelian, and Kantian. The analogy between the indecomposable elements of thought and the atoms of the different elements. Logical terms and valencies. The indecomposable elements of the phaneron. Propositions and assertions. Omissions from publication (Second Notebook) include a discussion of the three modes of mental analysis (dissociation, precision, and discrimination). Application of these modes to primanity, secundanity, and tertianity, e.g., primanity can be prescinded though it cannot be dissociated from secundanity, but secundanity cannot be prescinded but only discriminated from primanity. Finally, the use of existential graphs to explain logical fallacy.